Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> To invest in Rossi, one would have to bet that Mills’ IP can be > circumvented . . . > To reiterate, you do not need to circumvent a patent. You can invent something that extends it. The person licensing your patent must also license the basic patent. For example someone wanting to manufacture integrated circuit semiconductors 1960 would have to license from both Texas Instruments and AT&T. As I mentioned before, this is an important technology with military applications, so Uncle Sam will never allow Mills to stifle the technology by not granting licenses. That is not how patent laws are enforced. > and that Rossi can understand the mechanism well enough to make it > reliable and increase the COP at the same time. Both are longshots. > It is not necessary for Rossi to understand the mechanism. IH might hire someone else who can do that, with Rossi's assistance. It is not possible for you or anyone else outside of IH to judge what is a "longshot" and what is not. You would have to know a great deal more about the details of Rossi's research, and what others working with IH are up to. These details are secret. The COP does not need to be increased, as I said. It only needs to be controlled. It is already infinite in some cases. If Rossi has any problem it is the runaway reactions with no input power and an infinite COP. > I doubt that Cherokee did sufficient due diligence. > How would you know? What is the basis for your doubts? Imaginary problems the COP do not count. Did they consult with you? Have you read their paperwork and correspondence? - Jed
